The History of Petrochemical Transportation
Because of the wide diversity of locations where oil is harvested from earths' underground reservoirs, it is necessary to transport the crude oil from a land or sea-based location to many sites across the globe for refinement. History books have recorded massive spillage of crude and catastrophic ecological damage during this transportation phase because of hull failure of the vessel transporting the crude. While oil spill prevention is the primary purpose of this invention, the invention contemplates the prevention of spills of various types of liquids and gasses, primarily in the petrochemical industry.
Currently Used Technology
Currently, only one transport process is being considered to significantly lower the risk of ecological damage resulting from the breach in the hull integrity of petrochemical transport vehicles: The Double Hull. Oil tankers built now and in the future are required by the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA '90) to use double hulled construction to reduce the risk of oil spills due to grounding and collision, and the resulting adverse impact on the environment. Although the use of double hulls is a step in the right direction, it does not fully eliminate the likelihood of oil spills since the inner hull can still be penetrated in major accidents. Major oil spills, such as the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil tanker spill at Bligh Reef in Prince William Sound, Ak., can have devastating impacts on the environment, and the cost of oil recovery and restoration of the environment can be extremely high. Although the double hull is currently perceived by the public and political figures as the most “politically correct” solution to the problem, after lengthy review of the options available, the double-hull concept is flawed and still capable of failure for the same reasons as the single hull. Even with the destruction of the entire remaining existing fleet of tankers, barges, and intermediate vessels and the expenditure of billions of dollars for the construction of The Double-Hull vessels, it is a fact that the Double-Hull vessel is still capable of being pierced or crushed by an incoming object when the force of that object exceeds the strength of the hulls. The Double-hull proponents merely hope that two hulls are enough. Recent history reaffirms that even two hulls are not enough. Even with this knowledge, the petrochemical industry, driven by legislative momentum, a massively powerful and financially well-endowed lobbying organization and the ongoing voluntary implementation of the Double-Hull vessels into the current transportation, there appears to be a feeling among the major petrochemical interests that the cost of correcting the flaw in the vessel construction problem would not find a receptive market. Once again, the industry appears to accept petrochemical cargo spillage as “another risk of doing business.”Previous patents have struggled admittedly to only minimize the risk of hull breach with the use of various forms of bladders and reinforcement. Yet, each such patent admits that the loss of cargo would occur should both the bladder and its reinforcement be pierced during a hull breach.
This present invention allows the existing fleet of small, medium and large, single-hull and double-hull vessels that function as petrochemical transport vessels on various scales of magnitude, and VLCC (Very Large Crude Carriers) having single hulls to be converted and retrofitted to become more ecologically safe and physically predictable to unexpected hull pressures. Because of the custom nature of this invention, it is applicable to varying sizes of vessels.
The present invention also contemplates additional features for improving the integrity of the overall system during acts of war or attacks by criminals or terrorists who are attempting to cause oil spills by either dropping bombs, artillery shells, or the like on the upper surfaces of the ship, as well as impacting the sides and the underneath portions of the ship with torpedoes.
Some of The Savings Expected By Using Existing Retrofitted Vessels
By using the existing retrofitted vessels with this invention:                1) Literally billions of dollars will be saved that would have been used in constructing the new and vastly more expensive replacement vessels. The money saved can be invested at a much higher rate of return yielding greater profits than would have been lost in the purchase of new vessels before the existing ones actually require replacement due to extinction or mechanical failures.        2) The additional fuel necessary to move the heavier mass of double-hull tankers will be conserved while payload volume of transported crude will be maintained. When this savings is considered for every journey of every vessel during the lifetime of the vessel until mandatory replacement, this is a major environmental and financial savings making worldwide utilization of this invention even more feasible.        3) The ship scrap debris created from the unnecessary destruction (usually sinking to the ocean floor) of the entire world fleet of tankers will lessen the environmental impact on the world's refuse problem and the presence of sea-junk with its oxidation and ionic release into the sea.        4) And, the industry will have finally dealt with the actual petrochemical transport containment issues rather than just minimizing the risk but admitting the potential for failure of the other containment inventions. The potential damage to the environment as well as the financial outlay for clean-up or bio-remediation of spilled product is just too great to risk by not dealing with the actual problem at hand.Positive Aspects of Utilizing This Invention        
There are many positive reasons for utilization of this invention within the existing fleet of single-hull tankers that have been retrofitted with this present invention;                1) Improvement of existing vessels to deal with unexpected hull integrity problems;        2) Prevention of ecological tragedy that accompanies petrochemical spills;        3) Re-integration of vessel transport cell integrity following a hull breach where sea water enters the vessel;        4) Pre-Containment of Off-loaded crude;        5) Multiple-back-up system for off-loading of over-pressurized compartment contents;        6) Installation of invention with minimal time of vessel out of service;        7) Lower vessel hold maintenance costs;        8) Ability to change cargo type with more ease and safety from cross-contamination;        9) More safety to cleaning personnel of transport cells; and        10) Ability to protect off-loaded product from harm's way.        